Why does every one seem to think its automatic we go with Barcley over Jones? I think Jones passes the eyeball test way better then Barkley. Jones has a better arm, looks to have better accuracy, is rated much higher on most scout boards, is two inches taller then Barcley, and for what it's worth Oklahoma may not have the same cold as Cleveland, however if you have ever been there you would know that it's one of the windiest locations in the country. On top of that you see more inclement weather in the big 12 games as opposed to the PAC 12 , which tells me Jones may be more prepared for AFC North winters as opposed to Mr. SoCal.

"I don't think they're building chemical weapons in Berea. But they might be. I can't say for sure."Chuck Klosterman

LOL......sounds like a repeat of 2010.......what we NEED is consistency......play calling, an offensice scheme to be in place longer than 1 season (with no off-season mind you) and maybe a wide receiver and a non-third string running back........

sonoranreptile wrote:LOL......sounds like a repeat of 2010.......what we NEED is consistency......play calling, an offensice scheme to be in place longer than 1 season (with no off-season mind you) and maybe a wide receiver and a non-third string running back........

Consistent what though?

Again, of all those guys that got run out of town prematurely...who is lighting up the world right now as a HC? OC? QB? WR? RB?

I think everyone agrees consistency is a good thing. And good teams have that. Of course they are consistent because they are good. They are not good because they are consistent. Good teams do not replace systems, because, well they are good. Bad teams change systems because those things are not working. And no amount of time is going to make a bad coach, coaching bad players successful.

This reminds me of the argument about the Indians deciding to "teach" their young hitters to work deeper counts, since the good teams have hitters that work the count. Well, good hitters can work counts because they are good hitters. Bad hitters working counts just make your games take longer.

I don't know who they're gonna pick, but I think they will win at least one more game. They've got JVille & Arizona yet, and who knows what they'll pull outta their asses to drop further down in the draft.

I'd kill to even just have a season like Carolina's having. At least they're getting to watch Warren Moon II lace 'em up, kick ass and take names.

Swerb wrote:Go start a blog if you want to tell the world your incomprehendible ramblings.

Cerebral_DownTime wrote:I have a big arm and can throw the ball pretty damn far...... maybe even over those moutains. The Browns should sign me, i'll let you all in locker room to drink beer. Then we can all go out the parking lot to watch me do motorcycle stunts.

Holmgren said if we don't have our franchise QB, we're gonna keep picking guys until we find one. He's never given Colt a public vote of confidence that he's the guy. I think unless he turns it around...which is unlikely against our death row opponents....we are going to draft someone in April.

I think we get 1-3 more wins though, so this scenario is unlikely.. BUT.. think we could trade our two 1's and a 1 or 2 from 2013 with the Colts to take Luck? I mean, seems like it would be a great opportunity for the Colts to get crazy good around them for a couple last runs with a (potentially) healthy Manning. Furthermore, it would be an opportunity for the Browns to not waste those picks (which they would do simply by making selections...)

Of course, I do not think the Browns would do that, nor do I really think we should do that.. we seem to be in a decent position to make some interesting picks next season.. Like I said though, I think we accidentally get a win against a team or two down the road (no more than 3.. and likely only 1).. basically enough to put us out of the top five.

That being said... can we fire Shurmur? Or, at least, force him to hire an OC.. cause, let's be honest, he's awful.

Trsteve1, in years past I would agree with you on thinking sure the Browns might win a game or two they are not supposed to like the Pats and Saints games for the year before. But there is no way in hell I feel that way about this team with this coach. They are not going to win a single game the rest of the year. We will be 3-13 at the end of the year.

On 92.3 the morning show they said Holmgren said that Shurmur would be the last coach he hires so take that for what it is worth. Shurmur is not going anywhere as long as Holmgren is in charge.

I don't think the Colt trade that #1 pick and I honestly think Manning might never play again in the NFL. He has had multiple neck surgeries at his age. How lucky the one year you suck the maybe the next peyton Manning is available in the draft and he is all yours.

JCoz wrote:If you aren't getting luck I'd like to see the browns build more draft picks out of this draft, build up the rest of the team. Not like we wont be near the top of the draft next year as well.

Assuming no Luck scenario develops, I hope they stand pat and get 3 impact guys with the 1st 3 picks (2 rds). Good teams don't over think it. Although I like the idea of packaging lower picks to get back into the 2nd or even 3rd rd. Especially with all the 2nd-day types on this roster already.

JCoz wrote:If you aren't getting luck I'd like to see the browns build more draft picks out of this draft, build up the rest of the team. Not like we wont be near the top of the draft next year as well.

Assuming no Luck scenario develops, I hope they stand pat and get 3 impact guys with the 1st 3 picks (2 rds). Good teams don't over think it. Although I like the idea of packaging lower picks to get back into the 2nd or even 3rd rd. Especially with all the 2nd-day types on this roster already.

They dont neccessarily have to stand pat to end up with 3 picks in the first two rounds. But if they stood pat, like I said I think Richardson would be tough to pass up there.

In no way would I pass up another Atl-type trade if the opportunity presented itself though.

I mentioned this in the other thread....guys, 1st and 2nd round picks are NOT going to be flying around. The financial part of the equation is gone, which was a main reason for teams moving them.

Do your homework in those rounds and you get a nice player at a bargain price for four years.

As far as the Colts go, dealing would be the ultimate sign of paying for the past. Cause you choose a guy that age in today's NFL, coming off a MAJOR injury, the outcome you aren't sure to be aware of on draft day over a guy EVERYONE believes is a slam dunk, you're making a mistake.

leadpipe wrote:I mentioned this in the other thread....guys, 1st and 2nd round picks are NOT going to be flying around. The financial part of the equation is gone, which was a main reason for teams moving them.

Do your homework in those rounds and you get a nice player at a bargain price for four years.

As far as the Colts go, dealing would be the ultimate sign of paying for the past. Cause you choose a guy that age in today's NFL, coming off a MAJOR injury, the outcome you aren't sure to be aware of on draft day over a guy EVERYONE believes is a slam dunk, you're making a mistake.

I agree for most scenarios but in certain spots that also cuts both ways, some of these really high 1st rounders were immovable in the past due to the massive amount of money someone would have to pay out for the contract, forgeting the cost in draft picks.

I certainly do not think the Colts are moving and I dont think another ATL offer will likely come those are few and far inbetween. But there will still be opportunities to move around and gather additional picks.

The reduction in contracts IMO, is not going to reduce the number of draft day trades significatly.It will change the value of the componants of such trades. I'm interested to see what Draft day looks like this season.

leadpipe wrote:I mentioned this in the other thread....guys, 1st and 2nd round picks are NOT going to be flying around. The financial part of the equation is gone, which was a main reason for teams moving them.

Do your homework in those rounds and you get a nice player at a bargain price for four years.

As far as the Colts go, dealing would be the ultimate sign of paying for the past. Cause you choose a guy that age in today's NFL, coming off a MAJOR injury, the outcome you aren't sure to be aware of on draft day over a guy EVERYONE believes is a slam dunk, you're making a mistake.

I agree for most scenarios but in certain spots that also cuts both ways, some of these really high 1st rounders were immovable in the past due to the massive amount of money someone would have to pay out for the contract, forgeting the cost in draft picks.

I certainly do not think the Colts are moving and I dont think another ATL offer will likely come those are few and far inbetween. But there will still be opportunities to move around and gather additional picks.

The reduction in contracts IMO, is not going to reduce the number of draft day trades significatly.It will change the value of the componants of such trades. I'm interested to see what Draft day looks like this season.

I agree. There will be trades. Maybe even more. Each draft will be different and it all depends on the player.

In this years draft, with a guy like Luck, that draft pick will command a Kings ransom. It doesn't matter if it's the old system or the new system. His talent far outshines any reservations about the salary.

But go back to whenever the hell Alex Smith was drafted and the first pick is all but unreadable under the old system. Nobody wants to pay that schmoe...and rightfully so. But if they had the wage scale in place, maybe that pick does become movable.

All I'm sayin' guys, is that a MAJOR component of MANY trades was the cost associated with a first round pick.

The financial aspect is now gone, making the first round picks more valuable to those who have them now, thus, there will be less movement, cause there's no reason not to want them anymore, whereas in the past there WAS a reason you might not want them. And that reason is now gone.

As JCoz mentions, the effect will be expotenially lesser with the second rounders, but I still see fewer trades (involving high picks) because what once evened the scale of draft pick supply and demand is gone, leaving a much higher demand than there will be supply. ILO.

Swerb wrote:Go start a blog if you want to tell the world your incomprehendible ramblings.

Cerebral_DownTime wrote:I have a big arm and can throw the ball pretty damn far...... maybe even over those moutains. The Browns should sign me, i'll let you all in locker room to drink beer. Then we can all go out the parking lot to watch me do motorcycle stunts.

Swerb wrote:Go start a blog if you want to tell the world your incomprehendible ramblings.

Cerebral_DownTime wrote:I have a big arm and can throw the ball pretty damn far...... maybe even over those moutains. The Browns should sign me, i'll let you all in locker room to drink beer. Then we can all go out the parking lot to watch me do motorcycle stunts.

Everytime I watch RGIII play I come away more and more impressed by the kid.

That said, there is no way this team drafts him. Andy Reid changed his offense to fit Vick. Shurmer and Holmgren will not run anything but a pure WCO as long as they are here and RGIII needs a Philly/Carolina styled offense to succeed.

e0y2e3 wrote:And seriously if this team drafts a WR or RB in the top ten Cleveland needs to just march to Berea and burn it down.

There is a lot of analysis I could do to prove that Super Bowl contenders don't draft RBs and WRs in the top ten, but instead I'll just say.... DON'T BE FUCKING STUPID.

This.

Draft a Franchise QB until you have one.

Swerb wrote:Go start a blog if you want to tell the world your incomprehendible ramblings.

Cerebral_DownTime wrote:I have a big arm and can throw the ball pretty damn far...... maybe even over those moutains. The Browns should sign me, i'll let you all in locker room to drink beer. Then we can all go out the parking lot to watch me do motorcycle stunts.